- Sep 2012
- Tarkington, Texas
M-14's failed as a SAW because the weapon is almost uncontrollable in automatic mode.
The is rather pop-news than anything. Hitting targets out to 1000 meters with a non-scoped rifle in battfield conditions is laughable. The Tablian may try but they would at best probably just make troops duck and cover. Marines at Bellau Wood in WW1 waited till the enemy closed to ~100 meters.3rdLargest. Thank you for your service. The 1000 yards quoted is usually meant as the distance from hilltop to hilltop in Afghanistan. No matter the exact measurement, the M249 was seen to hit the ground well before it hit an Afghan Sangar. An Afghan firing an old Lee Enfield could reach out and touch American troops trying to get at him.
For a bolt action rifle to hit point targets accurately out to 1,000 yards is far beyond the skill set of anyone. At best, it would deliver long range area fire, and that assumes they got their range estimation perfectly correct, because being off by only 10-20 yards means way short or way long.3rdLargest. Thank you for your service. The 1000 yards quoted is usually meant as the distance from hilltop to hilltop in Afghanistan. No matter the exact measurement, the M249 was seen to hit the ground well before it hit an Afghan Sangar. An Afghan firing an old Lee Enfield could reach out and touch American troops trying to get at him.Pruitt
The standard M14 yes, but the version that was supposed to be used as the squad automatic rifle was the M15 Squad Automatic Weapon. That weapon performed much better in full auto but was sidelined by the standard M14 because it was too complicated and slow to build, and technically the M14 with a bipod could replace it (just not well at all). This was a logistical decision, due to the problems of M14 production as a whole for all variants, which were a total embarrassment. Not only was it slow and far more costly than originally planned, but quality control was also terrible, and the result was nobody was getting them issued in the numbers originally planned, the roll out was a nightmare. So they decided not to get fancy, and just gave everyone in the squad the same crappy rifle, while canceling production early on and putting all their future plans on either a SPIW or SCHV rifle.M-14's failed as a SAW because the weapon is almost uncontrollable in automatic mode.
Shorter barrel usually increased accuracy, as it keeps the barrel stiffer, removing a variable of increased harmonic shift during shots. What it does do that is negative is decrease the velocity of a round. For something like most 5.56 loads, especially the older ones, which were very velocity dependent for lethality, it shortens their theoretical range. However, with a round that has better and more consistent terminal ballistics (on flesh), like the new M855A1 round, or when lethatlity isn't a concern and just putting a bullet into flesh anywhere and however is seen as a victory, then short barrel is still fine for long range, as long as the shooter has the means to make hits.Guys, calm down a bit! I have read articles from defense related magazines that said the M249 had issues with accuracy after 600 yards. They also complained that they were not suppressing hostile fire when fired at people on a hill. The magazines also said that a new round was tried that was "hotter" than regular 5.56 rounds to try and fix this. Then we get into Iraq and complaints started to roll in about the M249 was hard to use assaulting buildings, so they shortened the barrel. A shorter barrel degrades accuracy down range.
The Infantry rifle squad's mission is to assault lots of things, including rooms. SAWs are organic to rifle squads, there are two in an Army squad, and used to be three in an Marine squad. So either the SAW gunners wait outside, twiddling their thumbs, allowing their teams and squad to lose integrity and fight under manned, or they have to go with and do everything their fellow rifle squad members do. Which is the problem as a whole of including a LMG (like the M249) or GPMG (FN MAG, M60, MG 42, etc) in the squad at all. Because where the squad goes, the MG has to go too. And do you really want a LMG to clear a room? Or clear a trench? Or to low crawl with? Or climb over a wall? Or from the prone, stand up, sprint a few meters, then sprawl prone again, the famous 3-5 second rush? Because that is the sort of thing that rifle squad guys do. And that is all the stuff that carrying a 20 lb complicated open bolt, belt fed LMG sucks at.It baffles me why soldiers are trying to assault rooms carrying an M249 to begin with.
When it comes to rifles, there is point accuracy, aiming at a single target, like a person, and then there is area firing, when just placing rounds on target in a large area, like the side of a hill, or a big open plain, is good enough. To be considered inside the max effective range of a point target, a rifle needs to have the inherent accuracy of putting rounds repeatedly into an 18" circle, which is roughly the width of the human shoulders. If it can't then it cannot reliably hit a person at that range, so its beyond its max effective range on a point target. But a round still has max effective range on area targets, and that is usually when the round still has good lethality, and can still hit a larger area.I own an AR 15 and an M1A. Because I am getting older, I am losing some far vision. If I had to fire at 500 yards I would have trouble acquiring a target, let alone delivering accurate fire. During Basic Training we were expected to fire our M 16's out to 500 yards. I was not allowed to do this as I was on crutches from a knee profile. I do remember being told that we would have to "adjust" our targeting to hit out around 500 yards. An Afghan firing from the top of a hill would not be delivering accurate fire, but he could hit people, just maybe not the guys he was aiming at. Firing up the same hill I would expect most of the fire to hit short. It is what it does.
Sounds like you'd like the Ultimax 100.If I had to use a LMG in the squad/section, I'd want one designed to be use individually, one in 5.56 or using the new hybrid cased 7.62 NATO. The gunner would have a limited ammunition loadout, to ensure they can keep up with the rest of his squad/section. There would be limited/no crossloading of ammo in the rest of the squad/section unless the mission called for an extended base of fire. And the weapon system, unloaded and without accessories, would not weigh any more than 12 lbs.
The older model had the problem of only working with a special magazine, that was chiefly why it wasn't selected even back in the 80s. Either belt fed (which the Army wanted), or STANAG magazine fed (which the Marines wanted).Sounds like you'd like the Ultimax 100.